1 Journalist, 1 Shocking Remark, 1 Massive Uproar: Inside the Explosive Andhra Pradesh Media Scandal”
The Arrest That Shook Andhra Pradesh – Unpacking the Immediate Fallout
New Delhi The sudden arrest of senior journalist Kommineni Srinivasa Rao, a veteran news anchor associated with Sakshi TV, has triggered a wide-ranging political storm in the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, deepening an already entrenched conflict between media organizations and their political backers.
The arrest was carried out in the early hours of Monday, June 9, 2025, when the Andhra Pradesh police reportedly arrived at Rao’s residence in Hyderabad and transported him under tight security to Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. The move shocked not only the journalistic community but also underscored the increasingly volatile state of freedom of expression in Andhra’s politically polarized environment.
❗ What Prompted the Arrest?
At the core of the arrest is a now-removed episode of the “KSR Live Show” on Sakshi TV, aired on June 6, 2025, in which a fellow panelist, journalist V.V.R. Krishnam Raju, allegedly made “obscene and malicious” remarks about the city of Amaravati and its residents. The statements, as documented in the police complaint, particularly targeted Dalit women, describing Amaravati as a “capital of prostitutes” and claiming it is inhabited “only by AIDS patients.”
These remarks were perceived as inflammatory, degrading, and deeply offensive by many, particularly members of the Amaravati Capital Farmers’ Dalit Joint Action Committee (JAC), led by Kambampati Sireesha, who hails from Rayapudi village in the Thullur mandal of the Amaravati region.
Sireesha’s complaint stated that the comments aired during the live broadcast were made with “apparent encouragement” from the Sakshi TV management and that they constituted a gross insult to the dignity of Amaravati’s women and particularly its Dalit community.
📜 Legal Charges Filed
The police promptly registered a First Information Report (FIR) charging Kommineni Srinivasa Rao, panelist V.V.R. Krishnam Raju (who has since gone into hiding), and the Sakshi TV management under a battery of legal provisions:
- Section 3(1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – for promoting enmity and ill-will against SCs and STs.
- Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 – for electronically publishing or transmitting obscene material.
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) charges including:
- Section 79 – for acts intended to outrage a woman’s modesty,
- Section 196 – for promoting enmity between groups,
- Section 353(2), 299, 356(2), and 61(1) – for various offenses related to sedition, criminal conspiracy, and offensive content.
These charges, taken together, form a serious legal framework that not only threatens the professional standing of Kommineni Rao but also brings into question the editorial freedom of newsrooms in politically sensitive climates.
Apologies, Clarifications, and Political Outrage – YSRCP Responds
The controversy that erupted following the broadcast of the “KSR Live Show” on Sakshi TV did not end with just public outrage and legal charges. In the hours and days following the show, the key participants involved—both on-screen and behind the scenes—attempted to manage the rapidly escalating crisis. At the heart of this effort was the embattled anchor Kommineni Srinivasa Rao, who maintained that his role was that of a moderator, not an instigator.
🎙️ Kommineni Rao’s Clarification: Caught in the Crossfire?
Soon after the controversial episode aired on June 6, 2025, Kommineni Srinivasa Rao reportedly issued a public clarification, distancing himself from the statements made by panelist V.V.R. Krishnam Raju. According to reports, Rao explained that he had cautioned the panelist during the broadcast and that his role as a moderator did not equate to endorsement.
Rao also stressed that the comments in question were brief, not forming the main thrust of the discussion, and were followed by efforts to steer the conversation away from controversy. His supporters, including members of the YSR Congress Party, pointed out that Rao had no editorial control over a panelist’s spontaneous remarks during a live show and therefore should not be criminally liable.
Sources close to Sakshi TV also said that the show was pulled offline immediately after the segment aired and that internal reviews were launched.
🧾 Apology from V.V.R. Krishnam Raju
Meanwhile, V.V.R. Krishnam Raju, whose remarks triggered the legal complaint, issued a public apology soon after the backlash began. In his statement, Raju reportedly claimed that his comments had been “misunderstood” and were never intended to demean the people or women of Amaravati.
He clarified that the controversial reference to Amaravati was aimed at certain areas allegedly linked to sex work, not the capital city or its residents in general. Despite the apology, the public mood remained charged, and calls for strict legal action intensified. Notably, Raju is said to have gone absconding shortly after the FIR was registered.
His disappearance further fueled public suspicion, leading to speculation that his actions were part of a deliberate provocation or a pre-scripted media stunt orchestrated for political gain—accusations that Raju’s camp has firmly denied.
🛡️ YSRCP: Cry of Political Vendetta
The strongest reaction came from the leadership of the YSR Congress Party (YSRCP), which is currently in opposition following the recent electoral victory of the Telugu Desam Party (TDP)-led alliance. YSRCP leaders were quick to denounce the arrest as a calculated political move to silence dissenting voices and penalize media houses critical of the ruling government.
Key Leaders Speak Out:
- Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy, the YSRCP state coordinator, slammed the arrest, calling it a direct attack on press freedom. He emphasized that Srinivasa Rao had done nothing wrong, and that the broadcast had already been clarified and apologized for.
- Former Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy denounced the arrest as a “vindictive act” by the TDP. He accused Chandrababu Naidu of using law enforcement to settle political scores and “gag” Sakshi Media, which has been a long-time critic of Naidu’s governance.
- Several former YSRCP ministers, including Ambati Rambabu, Vidadala Rajini, Taneti Vanitha, and Pamula Pushpa Srivani, claimed the arrest was a smokescreen designed to divert public attention from law-and-order failures under the new TDP regime.
Statements Emphasize Bias:
YSRCP leaders cited selective targeting by the police. According to them, TDP-allied media had made far more provocative statements in the past, including instances where Derogatory remarks against women were either ignored by authorities or downplayed entirely.
They further alleged that Srinivasa Rao has been on the ruling party’s radar for years due to his criticism of previous TDP governments. His career has been marked by professional turbulence during Naidu’s 2014–2019 term, and the current arrest is being viewed as a resumption of that targeted harassment.
🧩 Framing the Political Narrative: A Tale of Two Media Empires
This controversy cannot be separated from the broader media-politics matrix of Andhra Pradesh. The media landscape here is sharply divided, with major channels openly identified with political parties.
- Sakshi TV, founded by the late Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy, is now owned by his daughter-in-law Y.S. Bharati, wife of Jagan Mohan Reddy. It is widely seen as the voice of the YSRCP.
- On the other hand, Eenadu, ETV, and ABN Andhra Jyothy have long been viewed as supportive of the TDP, with many media executives and owners belonging to the Kamma community, the same caste group as Chandrababu Naidu.
This bitter rivalry between political-media alliances has, over time, resulted in frequent accusations of fake news, media bans, and even physical attacks on media offices. In this context, the Sakshi episode is seen as not just an isolated controversy but part of a larger strategic media battle.
Ruling Coalition Defends Arrest Amid Media Storm and Gender Backlash
As the controversy surrounding the Sakshi TV broadcast and the arrest of Kommineni Srinivasa Rao deepened, the ruling alliance in Andhra Pradesh—the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), Jana Sena, and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—responded with firm justifications. What began as a legal complaint had now spiraled into a full-blown political war, with both camps claiming to defend public interest, media ethics, and the dignity of women.
🏛️ Ruling Front Breaks Silence: Strong Justification for Action
🔸 N. Chandrababu Naidu: “Unacceptable, Offensive, and Deliberate”
Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, the head of the TDP and leader of the ruling coalition, came out strongly in defense of the arrest. In a public address, Naidu said:
“No journalist or panelist can be allowed to malign an entire region’s women and escape accountability under the veil of ‘free speech’. The remarks made on Sakshi TV were vulgar, deeply hurtful, and reflective of a dangerous mindset that cannot be tolerated.”
He denied that the action was politically motivated and insisted that law enforcement acted based on a legitimate complaint under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act and other relevant laws.
🔸 Pawan Kalyan: “This Was a Scripted Drama to Provoke”
Pawan Kalyan, Deputy Chief Minister and Jana Sena Party president, accused Sakshi TV and the YSRCP of staging a calculated controversy.
“This wasn’t spontaneous. It was well-scripted and broadcast with the intention of damaging the image of Amaravati and hurting women’s dignity. It reflects a distorted narrative that has long been peddled by the YSRCP,” he said.
Kalyan further asserted that YSRCP’s defense of Rao and Raju revealed their real stance on women’s rights and media accountability.
🔸 Nara Lokesh: “Sakshi Has Abused Its Platform”
Nara Lokesh, Minister of Human Resource Development and IT, and son of the Chief Minister, launched a direct attack on Sakshi TV’s ethics.
He highlighted that:
- Sakshi has not renewed its media license for over two years
- Its ownership structure and editorial agenda are deeply partisan
- It is being used as a tool for political revenge
He also raised serious concerns about the journalistic standards and broadcast conduct of the show.
“Why didn’t the anchor intervene firmly? Why was the clip uploaded and circulated widely after the show aired? Why did the network not issue an apology immediately?” Lokesh asked in a press interaction.
⚖️ Legal Institutions and Women’s Commissions Intervene
Amid the media and political firestorm, women’s rights bodies and media regulation institutions began weighing in on the issue.
📜 Andhra Pradesh Mahila Commission: Official Notice Issued
Rayapati Sailaja, Chairperson of the Andhra Pradesh Mahila Commission, held a press conference stating:
“The remarks made on the show were absolutely derogatory and have deeply disturbed women across the state. It is not just a freedom of expression issue—it is about public decency, social morality, and gender respect.”
The Commission sent notices to:
- Sakshi TV
- Kommineni Srinivasa Rao
- V.V.R. Krishnam Raju (panelist)
- Sakshi’s editorial management
Sailaja further demanded:
- Public apology from all those involved
- Explanation from Sakshi TV regarding editorial controls
- Clarification on why Raju is absconding
🧕 Protests by Telugu Mahila and Civil Groups
Women activists associated with the Telugu Mahila wing of the TDP staged protests outside Sakshi’s Guntur office, holding placards and chanting slogans condemning the broadcast and the management.
Many civil society organizations joined the protests, framing the issue as one that transcended political lines. Several pointed out that denigrating any group of women, whether Dalit or otherwise, in the name of political critique is unacceptable.
🎤 Media Accountability or Political Silencing?
The debate has divided the national media and intellectual community.
While many journalists condemned the panelist’s comments and questioned editorial responsibility, several also raised alarm over the arrest of an anchor for a panelist’s remarks. Questions were raised about press freedom, selective application of law, and state control over dissenting media houses.
🔊 Statements from Other Officials and Leaders:
- Dhulipalla Narendra Kumar, TDP MLA, called the remarks an intentional insult to Amaravati women.
- Kanumuru Raghurama Krishna Raju, Deputy Speaker, said that laughing along during such remarks made the anchor equally responsible.
- Bhanu Prakash Reddy, BJP state spokesperson, demanded an apology from Jagan Mohan Reddy, accusing him of remaining silent and thereby implicitly endorsing the incident.
- Alapati Suresh Kumar, TDP loyalist and chairperson of the A.P.C. Raghavachari Media Academy, accused Kommineni Rao of misusing journalistic privilege, citing a misrepresentation of a Times of India article during the broadcast.
⚠️ Rising Tensions: Street-Level Impacts
Pro-YSRCP journalists’ associations issued statements demanding an independent judicial inquiry into the use of police power.
Sporadic attacks on Sakshi TV offices, like in Renigunta, were reported and condemned by YSRCP leaders.
Police deployed reinforcements near Sakshi buildings in Vijayawada, Tirupati, and Visakhapatnam to prevent further violence.
Local police in Guntur remained on high alert, with Srinivasa Rao’s court production scheduled and supporters expected to protest.
Media Under Siege — The Political Ownership, Licensing Crackdown, and Battle for Narrative
The arrest of Kommineni Srinivasa Rao on June 9, 2025, and the political furor that followed has laid bare the deep-rooted and decades-old fault lines between media ownership and political power in Andhra Pradesh. In this part, we examine how newsrooms have become battlegrounds, how license disputes are weaponized, and how the Sakshi TV controversy is both a legal flashpoint and a symbolic struggle over narrative control.
📰 A Media Ecosystem Defined by Political Allegiance
🔻 Sakshi Media: More Than Just a Newsroom
Sakshi TV, where the controversial “KSR Live Show” aired, is part of the Sakshi Media Group, founded during the chief ministerial tenure of the late Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy (YSR) and currently owned by Y.S. Bharati, wife of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy—the YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) chief and former CM.
Sakshi was never just a neutral broadcaster—it was widely perceived as a pro-YSRCP channel, often involved in countering narratives pushed by rival networks. Over time, it became a political instrument, not unlike its adversaries.
It also publishes the Sakshi newspaper, which alongside the channel, was credited with building public support for Jagan Mohan Reddy’s rise after his father’s death.
🔺 Eenadu, ABN, and TV5: The TDP-Aligned Media Triangle
By contrast, channels like:
- Eenadu and ETV, owned by Ramoji Rao
- ABN Andhra Jyothy, led by Vemuri Radhakrishna
- TV5, owned by Bollineni Rajagopala Naidu
are seen as TDP-aligned or sympathetic to the leadership of N. Chandrababu Naidu. These channels were instrumental in mobilizing political narratives favorable to the Kamma community-dominated leadership within the TDP.
In many households in Andhra Pradesh, television channels are chosen not for news but for political loyalty. This fractured viewership has turned every newsroom into a political front line.
🧾 Licensing and Legal Tensions: Sakshi Under the Scanner
In the days following the arrest, TDP leaders and state officials introduced a new layer to the controversy: the question of Sakshi TV’s license renewal.
🚨 License Lapse Allegation
According to TDP national spokesperson Deepak Reddy:
“Sakshi has not had its broadcasting license renewed for over two years. The Government of India has flagged regulatory issues, and this must be probed in full.”
This revelation—if substantiated—could trigger a regulatory action by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, leading to suspension of operations or fines for the channel.
The Modi-led central government, already facing criticism for media clampdowns, has not commented publicly, but officials close to the Ministry indicated that Sakshi’s compliance records were under review even before the current controversy.
🔍 Enforcement Angle: Potential for Wider Crackdown?
If a licensing violation is proven, the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) could initiate inquiries under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), especially since Sakshi’s founding involved foreign investments, which critics allege may have bypassed standard norms.
These developments have made it increasingly likely that the controversy could evolve from a defamation case to a full-fledged investigation into Sakshi’s operational legitimacy.
🆚 Allegations of Political Retaliation and ‘Media Wars’
As the ruling coalition presses forward with legal, ethical, and licensing criticisms of Sakshi, YSRCP leaders and allied journalist unions allege a strategic political assault on dissenting media.
🟥 YSRCP’s Retort: “TDP Playing Selective Justice”
YSRCP leaders accused the TDP-led government of applying double standards:
- Ignoring complaints against TDP-aligned media outlets for inflammatory content during previous regimes.
- Rushing police action against a single channel and anchor within days of taking power.
- Filing charges under harsh sections intended to block bail, such as under the SC/ST Act and Section 67 of the IT Act.
YSRCP’s parliamentary leader Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy said:
“This is a coordinated campaign to silence one of the only channels that held the previous TDP government accountable. The comments made by a panelist, who apologized, are now being weaponized to arrest a moderator.”
🟧 “Media Vendetta” or Ethical Policing?
At the heart of the debate is whether this is:
- A genuine legal and ethical accountability process against media abuse
or - A retaliatory media vendetta enabled by new political power.
Critics say that journalistic moderators are not typically held criminally liable for panelists’ statements—unless there is clear editorial complicity or active encouragement.
⚖️ Legal Questions: Criminalizing Speech and Journalistic Roles
The charges against Srinivasa Rao and Sakshi TV include:
- Section 3(1)(u) of the SC/ST Atrocities Act: For promoting hatred against Scheduled Castes.
- Section 67 of the IT Act: For transmitting obscene content digitally.
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) sections: Including outraging modesty (Sec 79), promoting enmity (Sec 196), and others.
Legal experts are now dissecting:
- Whether a TV anchor can be booked for content by a guest speaker
- Whether platforms like Sakshi are liable under IT rules if they immediately take down objectionable content
- Whether obscene speech during a debate, when distanced from a target group, meets the threshold for criminal prosecution
Notably, this case will likely test the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for the first time in the context of digital speech and press conduct.
🎙️ National Media Responds: Mixed Concerns
Across India, the journalist community has responded with cautious concern.
- The Editors Guild of India has demanded an independent inquiry into whether due process was followed in arresting Rao.
- Press Council of India is reviewing complaints from both pro- and anti-Sakshi camps.
- Media Watchdog Newslaundry, AltNews, and BoomLive are fact-checking the broader claims made during the broadcast and subsequent reactions.
Several journalists have warned that arresting journalists for content not their own could set dangerous precedents, especially when channels are directly affiliated with political parties.
🔄 Parallel Precedents in Other States
The incident in Andhra Pradesh is not isolated. In recent years:
- Arnab Goswami (Republic TV) was arrested in Maharashtra in 2020
- Patrakar Vinod Dua was charged with sedition in Himachal Pradesh
- AltNews co-founder Mohammed Zubair was jailed over a tweet
Each case raised questions about the limits of free speech, criminal law overreach, and political vendetta through media regulation.
Srinivasa Rao’s arrest may soon become a national flashpoint, particularly if it leads to further clampdowns on Sakshi or other YSRCP-affiliated channels.
The Legal and Political Road Ahead — Bail, Protests, and a Test of Media Freedoms
As the initial shock surrounding the arrest of Kommineni Srinivasa Rao begins to settle, the focus has shifted sharply to what comes next—both in the courts and on the streets. This part explores the potential legal pathways ahead, the intensifying political standoff, and the looming implications for journalism and governance in Andhra Pradesh.
⚖️ The Judicial Fight: Rao’s Bail Plea and Legal Strategy
After being remanded to 14 days’ judicial custody and sent to Rajahmundry Central Jail, the legal team representing Kommineni Srinivasa Rao is expected to file a bail petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
📌 Key Legal Arguments in Bail Plea
Rao’s legal counsel is reportedly preparing a defense strategy centered around the following points:
- No Intent of Malice: The anchor did not make the offensive comments himself; he merely hosted the discussion.
- Right to Free Expression: The FIR, they argue, weaponizes provisions meant for actual hate speech and does not account for journalistic discretion.
- Violation of Natural Justice: Arrest without a show-cause notice or summons violates the anchor’s rights under Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 21 (personal liberty).
- No Prima Facie Offense Under SC/ST Act: As per existing legal precedents, moderators cannot be held criminally liable unless clear evidence of incitement or orchestration is present.
The legal team may also invoke judgments like:
- Kartar Singh vs State of Punjab (1994) on procedural fairness,
- Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015) on speech liability, and
- Journalist Protection Guidelines issued by the Press Council of India.
⏳ Fast-Track or Delayed Justice?
Given the political sensitivity of the matter, it remains unclear whether the High Court will hear the bail plea on an expedited basis. Judicial observers say bail is likely, but additional conditions or a gag order could accompany any release order.
🪧 Protests Escalate Across the State
As legal proceedings continue, the streets of Andhra Pradesh have become a canvas of competing ideologies.
🔵 Journalists’ Associations Mobilize
Several journalist unions, including:
- Andhra Pradesh Working Journalists’ Federation (APWJF)
- Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists (APUWJ)
- South Indian Journalists Confederation
have condemned the arrest as a threat to the fourth pillar of democracy. Rallies have taken place in:
- Vijayawada
- Visakhapatnam
- Tirupati
- Kurnool
- Hyderabad (solidarity protests)
They are demanding:
- Immediate and unconditional release of Srinivasa Rao
- Revocation of the FIR against Sakshi TV
- Clear national-level legal protection for journalists
🟡 Dalit and Civil Rights Groups Join In
Ironically, Dalit rights organizations are split. While some local Dalit groups lodged the original complaint, national Scheduled Caste groups like the Dalit Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DICCI) and Ambedkarite networks have called for caution in criminalizing speech unless there is direct and proven targeting.
This unexpected pushback has diluted the narrative of the FIR being purely a matter of caste-based outrage.
🏛️ State vs Centre: A Brewing Jurisdictional Faceoff?
A potentially explosive dimension is the emerging tension between the Andhra Pradesh state government and central media regulators.
📍 MIB and TRAI: Silent but Watching
- The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has so far remained silent on the Sakshi TV licensing claims.
- TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India), which oversees broadcast distribution, is reviewing complaints related to program code violations.
- The Broadcasting Content Complaints Council (BCCC), under the Indian Broadcasting Foundation, is likely to summon Sakshi TV’s editorial board for questioning.
If Sakshi is found guilty of content code violations or broadcasting without an updated license, the channel may face:
- Suspension of transmission,
- Monetary penalties,
- Or revocation of digital streaming rights.
This raises the prospect of a broader administrative showdown involving the Modi-led Union Government, which may be reluctant to be seen as indirectly backing a YSRCP-linked entity.
🧠 Internal Crisis Within Sakshi TV
Sources inside Sakshi TV describe a newsroom in turmoil. Several editorial members reportedly:
- Resisted airing the live segment, fearing the inflammatory tone of the panelist.
- Advised delaying or editing the broadcast for post-record vetting.
- Were overruled by senior producers, allegedly under pressure to match the aggression of rival pro-TDP channels.
An anonymous Sakshi staffer told reporters:
“This was not journalism; this was war disguised as primetime. Everyone was pushing political vendetta.”
There is now growing introspection inside the newsroom:
- Should anchors push back harder on toxic panelists?
- Should politically-owned media houses install independent editorial review boards?
- Should journalists accept positions in channels owned by active politicians?
Some editorial board members are reportedly considering resignations if Kommineni Srinivasa Rao is not defended legally and institutionally.
🏛️ Petition to Supreme Court and NHRC Under Preparation
Lawyers associated with People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) are said to be preparing:
- A writ petition to the Supreme Court challenging the use of SC/ST and IT Act provisions to criminalize media speech.
- A complaint before the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), arguing custodial detention of a journalist over third-party speech violates global press freedom norms.
If admitted, this would make the Kommineni Rao case the first major test case of journalistic rights under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
🧮 Political Fallout: Damage Control and Image Management
🟠 TDP’s Balancing Act
While CM Chandrababu Naidu has maintained a dignified silence, his party leaders are trying to project the action as a legal enforcement, not political vengeance.
Privately, some TDP strategists fear:
- The arrest may embolden opposition unity around media freedom.
- If the High Court grants bail, it could be seen as judicial censure of TDP’s aggressive policing.
- Public sympathy may shift, especially among journalists and educated voters.
🔵 YSRCP’s Mobilization
Former CM Jagan Mohan Reddy, although yet to make a full public statement, has reportedly instructed:
- Legal aid and support to Rao and Sakshi management,
- Mobilization of district-level party units to organize support rallies,
- Preparing legal countersuits if any official attempts to block Sakshi’s broadcast license.
This might serve as the first political flashpoint of the post-election landscape, reigniting YSRCP’s stalled public engagement after its electoral defeat.
🚨 Conclusion: A Test Case for Indian Journalism in the Age of Polarization
As of now, Kommineni Srinivasa Rao remains in jail. Sakshi TV continues to broadcast but is under strict legal and regulatory scrutiny. TDP maintains that justice is being served, while YSRCP and allied groups allege a clear misuse of state machinery to suppress dissenting voices.
This case is far from over. It’s more than a question of one anchor or one channel—it’s a test of how India’s democracy handles media partisanship, political ownership, and the fine line between freedom and responsibility.
Also Read : 5 Key Twists in ‘Operation Honeymoon’: Sonam’s Chilling Escape After Raja Raghuvanshi’s Murder
